美国衰落，人口老龄化，生产力丧失，政治两极化
美國人眼中的美國衰退
衣冠城
自從大陸領導階層做出「東升西降」的歷史走向判斷，中文世界裡有關美國衰退的文章可說是汗牛充棟。美國政治人物當然不承認，歐巴馬說美國還可以領導世界100年；拜登說不要賭美國輸。只有川普比較老實，說要讓「美國再次偉大」，坦承美國現在並不偉大。美國媒體也少有唱衰美國的。但專業的學術研究者又怎麼看美國國運？
近日具軍方背景的智庫「蘭德公司」公布了一份研究報告，報告承認美國國際地位「相對」下降了。這份報告或許可提供比較客觀的判斷，報告可看到美國國力的現實與國家面臨的挑戰，更重要的是，看到美國知識分子找出的解決之道，更能準確的理解他們對美國衰退的認知與可能採取的策略。
這份名為《國家活力再興的來源》報告承認「美國地位的相對下降」。美國競爭地位相對衰退來自內外的夾擊。主要的內部因素有生產力增長放緩、人口老齡化、兩極分化的政治體系和日漸惡化的資訊環境等；外部因素則有中國崛起的威脅，及美國失去多數發展中國家的信任和尊重。研究警告說，這種下降正在加速中。
報告進一步分析導致美國衰退的內在原因還有社會驕奢淫逸、科技趕不上實際需求、僵化的官僚體系、公民道德淪喪、軍事過度擴張、自私又好鬥的上層菁英及破壞環境永續的觀念與習慣。
這些問題存在已久，也歷歷在目，甚至老生常談，但作者指出，美國社會不同階層和政治菁英對美國衰退的根本問題看法截然不同。「對於衰落，有一種右翼的敘述，也有一種左翼的敘述。儘管他們一致認為美國有些事情出了問題，但雙方在如何解決問題上存在分歧，且往往是極端的分歧」。而且菁英階層也缺乏對關鍵問題領域進行變革的決心。
作者從歷史中發現能從長期衰退中恢復過來的大國屈指可數，無論是古羅馬、西班牙哈布斯堡王朝、鄂圖曼帝國和奧匈帝國，或蘇聯，當大國因國內因素而失去優勢或領導地位時，它們很少扭轉這一趨勢。
作者指出，除非美國人能夠團結起來正視問題，否則就有陷入螺旋式下降的風險。要重振美國，首先就要承認問題的存在，而不是活在美好的過往；用解決問題的態度面對問題，而非靠意識形態；改善治理結構，承認美國政治制度出了問題；最後，也是最難的是菁英對公益的實踐。
以上分析的確精準點出美國的病癥，但也不見太多新意，比較值得玩味的是作者提供的歷史藥方。他認為固然歷史上大國復興的例子不多，但英國的維多利亞時期與美國的羅斯福「新政」都極具參考價值。
這兩個例子有幾個共通處，就是國家經過快速工業化之後出現嚴重的分配問題與階級矛盾，而政治體制若不改革，社會將會出現更大的動盪。英國當時出現「憲章運動」，而美國也出現「進步運動」推動政治與社會革新。國家角色也有很大的轉變，原本自由放任的政府都開始承擔起更多責任，重新作社會資源配置與權力開放，更重視人道與公平。更重要的是知識分子與政治人物取得共識，接受進步思想，一起帶領國家走出困境，再造光榮。
其實從這兩個例子就知道作者心中的解藥：政治上改革腐敗的統治階層，社會與經濟上更重視平等分配。拜登剛上任時也找來一堆歷史學家研究羅斯福總統，但這個任期都快結束，除了赤字大幅增加外，也看不到什麼建樹，更遑論大力革新了。
2024年總統選舉重演4年前的戲碼，無論誰當選，依照報告的期許，美國都離「復興」越走越遠。 （作者為退休大學教師）
>>>>>
美国权力的太阳正在慢慢落山吗？ 这取决于我们。
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/26/david-ignatius-rand-study-us-forecast-decline/
作者：David Ignatius 专栏作家 2024 年 4 月 26 日 David Ignatius 为《华盛顿邮报》撰写每周两次的外交事务专栏。 他的最新小说是《圣骑士》。 推特
美国可能正在跌跌撞撞地走向衰落，很少有大国能够从中恢复过来。 它拥有许多国家复苏的工具，但尚未就问题以及如何解决问题达成共识。
这不是 MAGA 或进步传单中的引述。 这是兰德公司受五角大楼净评估办公室委托进行的一项令人震惊的新研究的总结。 在这个关键的选举年，这应该为美国敲响警钟。
兰德公司的研究报告的标题是“新的国家活力的来源”，将于周二发表。 这是五角大楼办公室委托编写的一系列报告的一部分，旨在评估美国在面对崛起的中国时的竞争地位。 我得到了一份早期副本，因为我之前写过有关该项目及其在兰德公司的主要作者 Michael J. Mazarr 的文章。
尽管这份报告大部分都是用社会学的枯燥语言写成的，但这却是爆炸性的东西。 其直言不讳的评价符合净评估办公室的传统，该办公室于1973年冷战的惨淡日子里成立，旨在“思考不可想象的事情”。 该办公室的创始主任是安德鲁·马歇尔（Andrew Marshall），他是一位著名的古怪的逆向思想家。 该机构现由詹姆斯·贝克 (James H. Baker) 领导，他是一位广受尊敬的退役空军军官，曾担任两任参谋长联席会议主席的战略家。
正如报告所问，是什么导致“美国地位相对下降”？ 开篇一章赤裸裸地解释了美国的问题："它的竞争地位受到来自内部（生产率增长放缓、人口老龄化、两极分化的政治体系和日益腐败的信息环境）和外部（直接增长的增长）的威胁。 来自中国的挑战以及数十个发展中国家对美国力量的尊重下降）”。
研究警告说，这种下降正在“加速”。“社会不同阶层和政治领导人群体对这个根本问题的看法截然不同。”对于衰落，有一种右翼的叙述，也有一种左翼的叙述。尽管他们一致认为美国有些事情出了问题，但双方在如何解决问题上存在分歧，而且往往是极端的分歧。
除非美国人能够团结起来找出并解决这些问题，否则我们就有陷入螺旋式下降的风险。 作者指出：“从长期的国家衰退中恢复过来是罕见的，并且在历史记录中很难发现。” 想想罗马、西班牙哈布斯堡王朝、奥斯曼帝国和奥匈帝国，或者苏联。“当大国因国内因素而失去优势或领导地位时，它们很少扭转这一趋势。”
是什么原因导致国家衰落？ 兰德公司的作者列举了 2024 年大家再熟悉不过的触发因素。“奢侈和颓废上瘾”、“跟不上……技术需求”、“僵化”官僚主义、“公民道德丧失”、“军事过度扩张”、“ 自私和交战的精英”，“不可持续的环境实践”。 这听起来像你所知道的任何国家吗？
作者认为，挑战是“预期的国家复兴”——换句话说，在问题解决我们之前先解决问题。 他们对历史和社会学文献的调查确定了更新的基本工具，例如认识到问题； 采取解决问题的态度而不是意识形态的态度； 拥有良好的治理结构； 也许最难以捉摸的是，保持“精英对共同利益的承诺”。
不幸的是，在这份“修复它”清单上，兰德公司的作者将美国 2024 年的表现评为“疲弱”、“受到威胁”，或者充其量是“好坏参半”。如果我们诚实地照照国家镜子，我们都可能会 分享该评估。
那么出路是什么？ 兰德提供了两个案例研究，其中紧急改革打破了腐败和混乱，否则可能会造成灾难性的后果。
第一个例子是1800年代中期的英国。 它建立了一个极其成功的全球帝国。 但到了 19 世纪中叶，它的内部正在腐烂，原因是“工业化造成的人员和环境损失、政治机构的腐败和低效、一小群地主精英对政治的控制、经济不平等的加剧等等” ”。 但英国掀起了一股改革浪潮，席卷了英国人的生活并改变了政治。 从托马斯·卡莱尔到查尔斯·狄更斯，知识分子领袖都对改革抱有同样的热情。
第二个案例研究可以在 中找到
在 19 世纪末镀金时代的狂欢之后，美国本身。 工业繁荣改变了美国，但也造成了恶性不平等、社会和环境破坏以及严重腐败。 共和党人西奥多·罗斯福领导了一场“进步”运动，改革了政治、商业、劳工权利、环境和政治腐败沼泽。
兰德公司的作者引用历史学家杰克逊·利尔斯的话说：“进步主义者有着‘重生的渴望’，并试图为‘看似脆弱且即将崩溃的现代文化注入一些内在的活力’。”
这项研究的信息非常明显。 美国正在走下坡路，这可能是致命的。 拯救我们的是从精英开始的广泛承诺，为共同利益和民族复兴而努力。 我们有工具，但我们没有使用它们。 如果我们无法找到新的领导者并就适合所有人的解决方案达成一致，我们就会陷入困境。
客观分析。 有效的解决方案
新的国家活力的源泉
作者：Michael J. Mazarr、Tim Sweijs、Daniel Tapia 2024 年 4 月 30 日
历史记录揭示了国家从长期衰落中复苏的哪些内容？哪些因素可以区分成功的预期更新案例和失败的案例？美国是否进入衰落期，是否具备预期复兴的前提？
历史上充满了大国达到竞争力顶峰，然后停滞不前并最终衰落的例子。面对如此逆风并成功形成反复上升轨迹——以更新其绝对和相对实力和地位的大国的例子越来越少。可以说，这正是美国面临的挑战。它的竞争地位受到来自内部（生产率增长放缓、人口老龄化、两极分化的政治体系和日益腐败的信息环境）和外部（来自中国日益增加的直接挑战和对美国实力的尊重下降）的威胁。 来自数十个发展中国家）。如果不加以控制，这些趋势将威胁到国内和国际竞争地位的来源，从而加速美国地位的相对下降。
在这份报告中，作者通过研究国家衰落和复兴的问题来阐明这一挑战。 这是一项关于国家竞争地位的社会决定因素的更大规模研究的一部分，该研究提出了决定社会竞争成败的几个关键品质。 第一阶段的研究结果表明，国家要实现多个时期的繁荣期或国家活力的巅峰是非常困难的。 本报告是针对不同主题的几项独立第二阶段分析之一，这些分析结合了历史案例分析和当代评估，探讨了美国这样做的前景。
主要发现
“从长期的重大衰退中恢复过来是罕见的，并且在历史记录中很难发现。”当大国因国内因素而失去优势地位时，它们很少能扭转这一趋势。
“美国可能正在进入一个需要国家复兴的时期，这在几个历史案例中都有体现。”在少数情况下，社会发现了其竞争地位面临的挑战，并进行了基础广泛的社会、政治和经济改革以维持其权力。 然而，当这些过程开始时，它们还没有显着下降（如果有的话）。
“似乎有几个共同因素可以区分预期更新的成功案例和失败案例。”有七个主要的社会特征与竞争成功相关。
“美国尚未表现出对社会挑战的广泛共识或在关键问题领域进行改革的决心。”对于需要采取紧急行动的复兴障碍尚未达成共识，社会不同阶层和政治领导人团体对基本问题的看法截然不同，这给多重努力带来了明显的挑战。
“美国具备潜在的预期更新议程的所有先决条件。”它具有巨大的剩余强度以及经过验证的恢复力和更新能力。它拥有规模、工业和科学基础以及丰富的社会行动者库，足以保持世界政治顶峰的大国之一。
Is the sun slowly setting on U.S. power? That depends on us.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/26/david-ignatius-rand-study-us-forecast-decline/
By David Ignatius Columnist April 26, 2024 David Ignatius writes a twice-a-week foreign affairs column for The Washington Post. His latest novel is “The Paladin.” Twitter
The Rand study, which has the anodyne title “The Sources of Renewed National Dynamism,” will be published Tuesday. It's part of a series of reports commissioned by the Pentagon office to assess the United States’ competitive position as it faces a rising China. I was given an early copy because I've written previously about the project and its lead author at Rand, Michael J. Mazarr.
Though the report is mostly written in the dry language of sociology, this is explosive stuff. And its blunt evaluation is in the tradition of the Office of Net Assessment, which was created in 1973 during the bleak days of the Cold War to “think about the unthinkable.”The office's founding director was Andrew Marshall, a famously eccentric contrarian thinker; it is now headed by James H. Baker, a widely respected retired Air Force officer who served as strategist for two chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
What has led to “the relative decline in U.S. standing,” as the report asks? The opening chapter explains America's problem starkly: “Its competitive position is threatened both from within (in terms of slowing productivity growth, an aging population, a polarized political system, and an increasingly corrupted information environment) and outside (in terms of a rising direct challenge from China and declining deference to U.S. power from dozens of developing nations).”
This decline is “accelerating,” warns the study. "The essential problem is seen in starkly different terms by different segments of society and groups of political leaders.” There's a right-wing narrative of decline and a left-wing one. Though they agree that something is broken in America, the two sides disagree, often in the extreme, on what to do about it.
Unless Americans can unite to identify and fix these problems, we risk falling into a downward spiral.“Recovery from significant long-term national decline is rare and difficult to detect in the historical record,”the authors note. Think of Rome, or Habsburg Spain, or the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires, or the Soviet Union. "When great powers have slid from a position of preeminence or leadership because of domestic factors, they seldom reversed this trend.”
What causes national decline? The Rand authors cite triggers that are all too familiar in 2024. "Addiction to luxury and decadence,”"failure to keep pace with … technological demands,”“ossified” bureaucracy, "loss of civic virtue,” “military overstretch,”“self-interested and warring elites,”“unsustainable environmental practices.”Does that sound like any country you know?
The challenge is “anticipatory national renewal,” argue the authors — in other words, tackling the problems before they tackle us. Their survey of historical and sociological literature identifies essential tools for renewal, such as recognizing the problem; adopting a problem-solving attitude rather than an ideological one; having good governance structures; and, perhaps most elusive, maintaining “elite commitment to the common good.”
Unfortunately, on this “fix it”checklist, the Rand authors rate U.S. performance in 2024 as“weak,”“threatened”or, at best,"mixed.”If we look honestly in the national mirror, we're all likely to share that assessment.
So what's the way out? Rand provides two case studies in which urgent reforms broke through the corruption and disarray that might otherwise have proved catastrophic.
The first example is Britain in the mid-1800s. It had built a fantastically successful global empire. But by the middle of the 19th century, it was rotting on the inside from “the human and environmental toll of industrialization, perceived corruption and ineffectiveness of political institutions, control of politics by a small group of landowning elites, rising economic inequality, and more.” But Britain rallied with a wave of reform that swept British life and transformed politics. Intellectual leaders shared this passion for reform, from Thomas Carlyle to Charles Dickens.
A second case study can be found in the United States itself, after the binge of the Gilded Age of the late 19th century. That industrial boom transformed America, but it created poisonous inequalities, social and environmental damage, and gross corruption. Republican Theodore Roosevelt led a "Progressive" movement that reformed politics, business, labor rights, the environment and the political swamp of corruption.
“Progressives had a 'yearning for rebirth' and sought to inject 'some visceral vitality into a modern culture that had seemed brittle and about to collapse,'” note the Rand authors, quoting historian Jackson Lears.
The message of this study is screamingly obvious. America is on a downward slope that could be fatal. What will save us is a broad commitment, starting with elites, to work for the common good and national revival. We have the tools, but we aren't using them. If we can't find new leaders and agree on solutions that work for everyone, we're sunk.
The Sources of Renewed National Dynamism
by Michael J. Mazarr, Tim Sweijs, Daniel Tapia Apr 30, 2024
DOWNLOAD EBOOK FOR FREE
| Format | File Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| PDF file | 0.8 MB |
Research Questions
- What does the historical record reveal about national recovery from long-term national decline?
- What factors distinguish cases of successful anticipatory renewal from those that fail?
- Is the United States entering a period of decline, and does it meet the preconditions for anticipatory renewal?
History is full of great powers that hit a peak of competitive power and then stagnate and eventually decline. There are fewer cases of great powers that have confronted such headwinds and managed to generate a repeated upward trajectory—to renew their power and standing in both absolute and relative terms. Arguably, that is precisely the challenge that faces the United States. Its competitive position is threatened both from within (in terms of slowing productivity growth, an aging population, a polarized political system, and an increasingly corrupted information environment) and outside (in terms of a rising direct challenge from China and declining deference to U.S. power from dozens of developing nations). Left unchecked, these trends will threaten domestic and international sources of competitive standing, thus accelerating the relative decline in U.S. standing.
In this report, the authors shed light on this challenge by examining the problem of national decline and renewal. It is part of a larger study on the societal determinants of a nation's competitive position, which has nominated several key qualities that determine a society's competitive success and failure. The findings of the first phase of the study suggest that it is very difficult for countries to achieve multiple periods of efflorescence or national peak dynamism. This report is one of several independent second-phase analyses on distinct topics that examine the prospects for the United States to do so, combining historical case analysis with contemporary assessments.
Key Findings
- "Recovery from significant long-term national decline is rare and difficult to detect in the historical record." When great powers have slid from a position of preeminence because of domestic factors, they have seldom reversed this trend.
- "The United States may be entering a period requiring the kind of anticipatory national renewal found in several historical cases." In a few cases, societies identified challenges to their competitive position and undertook broad-based social, political, and economic reforms to sustain their power. However, they had not yet declined significantly (if at all) when these processes began.
- "Several common factors appear to distinguish cases of successful anticipatory renewal from failures." There are seven major societal characteristics associated with competitive success.
- "The United States is not yet demonstrating widespread shared recognition of societal challenges or determination to reform in key issue areas." There is no emerging consensus on the barriers to renewal that demand urgent action, and the essential problem is seen in starkly different terms by different segments of society and groups of political leaders, which creates a distinct challenge for the multiple efforts.
- "The United States has all the preconditions for a potential agenda of anticipatory renewal." It has tremendous residual strengths and a proven capacity for resilience and renewal. It has the scale and industrial and scientific foundations and a rich reservoir of social actors to remain one of the great powers at the apex of world politics.
Research conducted by
This research was prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense and conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Program of the RAND National Security Research Division.
This report is part of the RAND research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.
